Thanks for the advice Roger. Nice sentiments as usual, but woofing? Is that what you call it? You're entitled to your opinion but what you describe as woofing is more along the lines of the diarrhea diatribe screamed by Moammar Gadhafi?
Naysayers Unite
- Thread starter duckie
- Start date
Thanks for the advice Roger. Nice sentiments as usual, but woofing? Is that what you call it? You're entitled to your opinion but what you describe as woofing is more along the lines of the diarrhea diatribe screamed by Moammar Gadhafi?
Much in the same way you adored your own font size in your PDF when mlalum mentioned it, maybe John thinks that typing that way is really COOL.
LOL
Stalker....
Like this thread has anything to do with John's prowess on a keyboard or as if John's typing ability has anything to do with his ability to pocket balls and his opinion on systems. LOL!!!
Can't help it if you keep opening your mouth and leaving yourself wide open like you do.
Have a nice day.
mlalum
Banned
Much in the same way you adored your own font size in your PDF when mlalum mentioned it, maybe John thinks that typing that way is really COOL.
LOL
OMG. don't get me into this one. I'm sorry. Your choice of fonts and spacing is the nuts. Please no.
I understand your reading and compression is on the level of most 3rd graders, but I think I was pretty clear.
Here, read it again real slow. "So John Schmidt thinks CTE is a joke because doesn't know how to use it???? Does he think spacebars, commas and spelling are jokes because he can't use them either?"
stalker....
Oooooh.
Such a caustic tongue with the onslaught verbal wit. Worthy of a Pulitzer prize.
Next.
Why would a fellow instructor feel the need to bash another instructor? That's beyond me!! If you had good intentions, you would've only typed the last three sentences in your post!! Save your breath, you'll need it to blow up your date!!
Coming from the masked man...
Didn't you mean to say comprehension where you used the word "compression" in the above quote?
Maniac
That's gonna leave a mark.
This thread has some really classless posts on it, but attacking a person who isn't even involved in this thread for his keyboard prowess is pretty low on the totem pole imo.
Maniac
That's gonna leave a bigger mark.
These threads alway do. Its as close as you can get to NPR while actually talking about pool.
So John mocking CTE or whatever is classy?
Yea, my day is ruined. Bummer.
CTE is not a person.
If you can verbalize what the CTE reference points are, where edges line up, which way to pivot and so forth, then it can be put on paper to show how CTE works.
All it takes is two circles, a few points and a few lines. I mean if you can try to use a photo of two ball to show lines, why not on paper?
I've been doing a little drawing on my own. I actually have a drawings that shows how the size of the pocket, distance the OB is from the pocket and the angle the OB is from the pocket affects the size of target zone on the OB. The size of the target zone also shows the range of movement the CB contact patch on the CB contact patch arc can have and still make a ball. By use full scale drawings, I now have a better sense of what the aim point range is that I can move my aim point within and still make the ball.
Phil Chapelle refers to this a margin of error area. Thats the area on the OB that if the CB makes contact anywhere in that area, the OB will go in the pocket. For a center pocket, the CB would have hit in the center of that area.
I call it target zone because that area is also the area that can be used to cheat the pocket.
All this from putting things on paper first then going to the table to verify.
Sometimes it is not all about table time, but fully understanding how something works first before appling that knowledge. This actually requires thinking and really breaking things down to the smallest detail and this is where CTE fails unlike GB. There are no details that can be put on that prove how CTE works.
Another idea about drawing on paper is that it is another form of visualizing the shots. To draw the shot, you have to see them in your head, so its kinda like practice without the table.
I know I use alot of new terms and some of the new terms are just old terms renamed so that they fit better into my GB method.
All it takes is two circles, a few points and a few lines. I mean if you can try to use a photo of two ball to show lines, why not on paper?
I've been doing a little drawing on my own. I actually have a drawings that shows how the size of the pocket, distance the OB is from the pocket and the angle the OB is from the pocket affects the size of target zone on the OB. The size of the target zone also shows the range of movement the CB contact patch on the CB contact patch arc can have and still make a ball. By use full scale drawings, I now have a better sense of what the aim point range is that I can move my aim point within and still make the ball.
Phil Chapelle refers to this a margin of error area. Thats the area on the OB that if the CB makes contact anywhere in that area, the OB will go in the pocket. For a center pocket, the CB would have hit in the center of that area.
I call it target zone because that area is also the area that can be used to cheat the pocket.
All this from putting things on paper first then going to the table to verify.
Sometimes it is not all about table time, but fully understanding how something works first before appling that knowledge. This actually requires thinking and really breaking things down to the smallest detail and this is where CTE fails unlike GB. There are no details that can be put on that prove how CTE works.
Another idea about drawing on paper is that it is another form of visualizing the shots. To draw the shot, you have to see them in your head, so its kinda like practice without the table.
I know I use alot of new terms and some of the new terms are just old terms renamed so that they fit better into my GB method.
Last edited: